Over the weekend, Cleveland police put the cart before the horse or, rather, the drone before the policy.
Sergeant Wilfredo Diaz confirmed that Cleveland Division of Police used a drone on Sunday as protestors gathered outside of County Executive Chris Ronayne’s house to protest the county’s investment in Israel Bonds.
Last week, the Cleveland Community Police Commission approved a policy that would allow police to operate drones. But, before drones can fly, the policy must be approved by the U.S. Department of Justice.
For months, Safety Chair and Council Member Michael Polensek and police leadership have put pressure on approving a policy that would get drones up in the sky. Ten drones have been sitting at the Division of Police for years, Polensek said during the Nov. 8 Safety Committee meeting, and he wanted them in the air.
Before approving the policy, the police commission heard resident concerns that the technology would be used to surveil protests and possibly religious gatherings.
One public commenter, Lucas Waggoner, said the policy was “intentionally vague” and contained “easily exploitable language” during the Nov. 20 police commission meeting.
The commission voted to approve the policy but removed language that would allow police to monitor “individuals or groups within large gatherings or for crowd control.” The decision was “reinforced by members of the public who spoke at the meeting,” according to Commissioner Piet van Lier.
He said the approved policy – with the amended language – had been sent to the Police Monitoring Team and the DOJ for approval. The DOJ has not approved it yet, according to van Lier.
What is a drone? A police drone is essentially a small flying camera. Since 2005, when the first drone was launched by U.S. law enforcement, police use has increased. The ACLU has critiqued the use of drones, raising concerns about violating a civilian’s rights against unreasonable search and seizures.
What happens when the drone policy is approved?
Commissioner Teri Wang said even after it is approved by the DOJ, the use of a police drone to spy on a large gathering is banned under the policy.
In the Division of Police’s reply to Signal Cleveland, Diaz cited the removed language as justification for putting the drone in the sky: “One of the Authorized Uses listed in that policy they passed is for ‘High-level observation of large gatherings or crowds for the purpose of ensuring public safety,’” he wrote.
That use was removed from the policy, according to van Lier and Wang. Now this issue continues as commissioners and Cleveland police await the DOJ.
Polensek said that he thought the decision to send a drone to Ronayne’s house was “intriguing.”
“I guess it’s all about who defines the priorities,” Polensek said. “At the end of the day, we need to get those drones up in the air.”
